Midsize Sedans 2.0

Comments

Are you talking net-net price, as in to buy and trade-in value? If so, they are likely to be about even, or more costly for the Fusion and Sonata. And are they the same car. Will they both look as good and drive as good five years down the road? Does the Fusion come with Stability Control?

It is hard to put a finger on the actual price. You could use Intellichoice website, which I used for the price when I went to the Honda dealership. My guess is that Sonata may deep discount the most, though Ford has to be pretty desperate by now, and may match Hyundai. But then again, not all the same features.Loren

Ford has Duratec derivatives that do exactly that - wind to 6500 with gas turbine smoothness, have big fat torque curves, and make you want to do it again and again. They're the 2.5/3.0 liter engines used by Jaguar. These are beefed internally, have VVT, solid lifters, triple stage mainfolding, and are high compression. They make enough suds to get a heavy AWD X Type automatic to 60 in 7.1 seconds and give it a top speed of 150 MPH (in Europe). US versions are electronically limited to 121 top end.

Its tough to beat a Honda engine. Add in all the ergonomics and tactile Honda feel with a huge dose of reliability and its tough to beat even a 5-6 year old designed Accord.

All the other cars in this class have redone their versions recently (maybe not the Mazda) and Honda can still outdo them. When the 08 Accord arrives Honda will, once again, set a new standard that all others will be compared to.

3.0L Duratec, and it's not as smooth as one would expect, and much noisier than any Japanese or Korean OHC V6. My point exactly, and not a reason to 'bash' Ford (or Mazda) products, more to point out that those particular cars could be improved so much with some heart transplants. Maybe the new DT 3.5 will help with the problem, but I'm not sure that it will acutally find its way under Fusion hoods. Putting the engine in a lower volume high priced Lincoln is one thing, getting it into the Fusion/Milan/6 may be more than Ford can handle from a production capacity standpoint.

I didn't say it was, the GM comment meant to point out that they have started to get rid of many of those old 50s vintage pushrods in favor of that new 3.6 which is all those things you seem to value. Keep in mind that the Honda V6, is still SOHC, and is unarguably vastly superior (in terms of HP and refinement) than the DT3.0. IT IS NOT all about the number of valves or cams you have, VVT etc - there is more to it than that, it's called refinement.

Its a balanced, rotating assembly. They all make some noise. What is a big difference is the amount of research that goes into insulating the driver from these vibrations.Even the older Hondas have very advanced, active engine mounts designed to dampen the vibration of the engine and mute sounds from the engine compartment (of course these fail over time and are somewhat costly to replace). Additionally, the exhaust note can be engineered as well. Cars like the Miata had extensive research put into optimizing the exhaust note.I don't understand why Ford doesn't sweat the details a little more with respect to NVH and all of these complaints will go away. Improved motor mounts and some additional insulation should solve the problem.Its funny though, I don't mind some mechanical noise. I think that is one of the reasons I like the Subaru so much. I feel part of the driving experience as opposed to isolated from it.

keeping this on topic, and comparing my wife's Altima VQ 3.5 then to the DT in the Fusion or any other Ford so saddled and disregarding the HP/torque differences. The Altima will rev freely and quickly right up to redline so much so that you almost have to be careful not to bounce off the rev limiter - the Fusion/6, well, you end up just kinda gritting your teeth as the engine strains to meet your demands, the engine is much louder and feels strained. I'm relatively sure it is a function of engine design and balance and engineering expertise, is probably going to need overhead cams, and some sort of method to keep an engine operating at peak efficiences in the higher rev ranges - otherwise known as VVTi (Honda/Nissan/GM 3.6/Hyundai) different than just VVT or CVVTi (Toyota). In essence, the DT has the basic ingredients, but somehow the cake was burned coming out of the oven. I think it is a shame that when Ford, in this case, was making money hand over fist back in the late 90's, that they didn't spend any of it on developing a competitive V6.

I'm relatively sure it is a function of engine design and balance and engineering expertise, is probably going to need overhead cams,

The DT 3.0 is an overhead cam motor. While I think you have the right idea of improving breathing at high RPM, I think your mental model of how variable valve timing technologies work is a little skewed.The i-VTEC in the Accord operates only on the intake. There is a low and high RPM mode, and some component in the rollers allows for additional variation (which is different then the double cam version which allows the cam to operate 25 degrees out of phase). This second system is similar to Toyota's VVTL-I which controls both lift and duration. The Porsche system (vario-cam) I believe primarily affects cam timing with respect to when the valves open, but not the lift and duration. I am ohly familiar with the earlier versions of Vario-cam so its very possible and likely they have modified their system as well.

The Altima will rev freely and quickly right up to redline so much so that you almost have to be careful not to bounce off the rev limiter - the Fusion/6, well, you end up just kinda gritting your teeth as the engine strains to meet your demands, the engine is much louder and feels strained.

I will not put down the VQ in any way, shape or form, since I agree it's a great engine, but the V6 in my 6, IMO, may be louder (due to less sound-deadening), but it's NEVER felt "strained" to me, whether it's on the open highway, or passing on a two-lane. Drop it a gear, hit the gas, and it goes, just as well as the VQ.

In terms of refinement, both the VQ and DT don't come close to Honda though...

I didn't say it was, the GM comment meant to point out that they have started to get rid of many of those old 50s vintage pushrods in favor of that new 3.6 which is all those things you seem to value. Keep in mind that the Honda V6, is still SOHC, and is unarguably vastly superior (in terms of HP and refinement) than the DT3.0. IT IS NOT all about the number of valves or cams you have, VVT etc - there is more to it than that, it's called refinement.

Okay, just checking as in the past some on that other discussion seemed to confuse the old Vulcan V6 with the Duratec. I guess I somewhat misunderstood your point as I got the impression you were saying the DT3.0 should be grouped with 1950s pushrods. And actually, I am not real concerned about the number of valves. etc., etc...

Anyway, I'm driving the 4 cyl Ford/Mazda engine. It seems fine to me, sounds good to me at all times and I have not felt there is any problem with reving the engine to redline. The one minor thing I have noticed is I feel some vibration in the steering wheel when stopped in "D"...I'll find out when I go for my first oil change if this is normal or not. I don't remember feeling this on my test drives, but that does not necessarily mean it was not there.

Car mags frequently suggest that one vehicle is "more or less refined"than another ! Now posters easily suggest that one engine is "more or less refined" than another . What exactly are we trying to describe when using this phrase to compare engines ? is it willingness to rev; NVH ( noise, vibration, harshness ); something else ?? Who`s willing to take a stab at defining this a bit better ?

Actually, it's a question that deserves some serious debate. What are the qualities of a vehicle in this class that any of you would define as "refined"? Indeed that is a term that is freely bandied about - let's quantify it in tangible terms. The badging itself has nothing to do with it.

Very interesting thread. Good question as to what Refined actually means, if anything. IMHO when a mag. road tester says refined he is saying there have been improvement made over the years it has been in production. These improvements make the car, engine, trans, A/C unit or whatever, more efficient, quieter, smoother, closer fit, etc. Whatever, it means it meets the consumers desires better than last year.So refined means better, more useful, cheaper...That's my opinion (at this time and I reserve the right to change my opinion in the future :shades: )

One of the things I really liked about the older Accord (don't have enough experience with the newer ones to comment) was the tactile feel of the buttons and knobs. Every control had a positive engagement and damped feedback.

I contrast this to the Contour, which had less satisfying controls which had hard clicks, although it too, had very positive engagement. The function was there, it just didn't feel as good. I also liked how easy to use the audio systems were in both of those cars.

The controls on the Legacy feel very Honda-like, with that damped engagement feeling. It doesn't have the control layout of the older Honda though, and I have to look down activate some features in the Subie (this might be because I don't drive it as much).

I think I can summarize refinement for me as the perception of quality in the things I touch when I'm in the car, so that is why I tend to concentrate on switches and controls.

I don't mind a bit of drivetrain noise, I like knowing there is an engine up there, so that's not a big issue with me, nor do I need the interior cabin to be a library or mortuary.

I'm happy to offer my take on the qualities that make an engine refined or not.

Using my Honda 2.4L inline 4-cylinder as an example of what I consider to be refined... Its as smooth at redline as at 1,000 rpm. Hold the RPMs anywhere in between and it always sounds and feels like it is meant for just that purpose; no vibration, and the tone from the engine and exhaust is nothing but pleasing. It never even gives you the impression that you are working it harder than it wants to. Going to high RPMs is sort of like switching from "Low" to "High" on my favorite 240-mph electric leafblower, in that it feels like just another setting available for normal use; no drama involved, just a louder "whoosh" and more performance when needed. Throttle it up and it lightly growls, then just sings... and you want to do it again. It is a great motor especially considering its in an inexpensive, practical sedan.

Now, a motor that is not refined has none of the above qualities. In fact, in many ways it will be opposite. It may be perfectly acceptable under normal conditions, but push it and the sounds are harsh and displeasing, and/or you can almost feel the motor is out of balance, thrashing or vibrating. It doesn't feel like it was made to rev that high. These engines make you feel guilty when you take them to redline, like you are damaging the motor based on how it sounds or feels through the controls. Floor it once, and you'll think "I don't need to do that again unless I have to." The impression is that the engine is tearing itself apart to get at those high revs.

When driving that DT30 Fusion, I enjoyed the performance, and please don't think I am "bashing" or "hating," but I wanted to lift off the throttle well before redline. It did not feel nearly as "refined." This, to me, takes away some of the enjoyment of putting an internal combustion engine through its paces.

To me refined refers not to previous iterations of that make. I use it in comparison to other vehicles.

If I think car A is more refined than car B, the sum of its qualities is better than it's competitor. A lot of it will be subjective (interior and exterior appearance, the feel of the controls, handling, etc). Some of it isn't (acceleration, noise, etc). It's really how good a end product it is as a whole from the smallest detail on up.

Do the door handles flex when you pull on them? Does the cup holder block the shifter? Does the steering wheel block the instrument cluster? Does the steering communicate to the driver what the car is actually doing? Do potholes make you wonder if parts of your car are falling off?

I love this.You say "that the Honda V6, is still SOHC, and is unarguably vastly superior (in terms of HP and refinement) than the DT3.0"You say that with a tone, to me anyway, that the Honda V6 is a superior power plant than, everything? I know that is not what you say, just the way it sounded when I reread it. That is a fine opinion and I am not saying you said anything wrong or that can be argued. You believe strongly in the, quality?, refinement?, efficiency?, superiority?, of the Honda engine(s).I have owned I4's Turbo I4's, I6's V6's H6's, V8's V10's OHV, SOHC, DOHC, 2v/c, 4v/c, 1.2L, 2.L, 2.6L, 3.0L, 3.6L, 5.0L 5.3L, 5.7, 6.2L, and 8L cars/trucks.They all had superior something to something else and performed their assigned tasks very well for a long time (except for the aluminum Vega engine).So what is your opinion comparing the Honda V6 toCadillac (GM) 3.6 DOHC VVT V6 (DI 300 H-P version)?Lexus IS 3.5 DOHC VVT V6 (306 H-P)?How about the Audi new Diesel engines?

don't know if it 'skewed' or not, but not too many years ago we would put grind cams in our engines that effectively would hold intake valves open longer and in a slightly earlier part of the piston stroke, this would allow the engine to suck some more gas (improving breathing), in the process producing more HP and obviously improving 'efficiency. The downside, of course, that loping idle becuase the engine would be less efficient at low rpms. So now we have VVT which is effectively a cam shift that occurs at higher engine speeds that does effectively the same type of thing except that it can also be 'programmed' to occur as deemed necessary by engine loads, fuel octanes etc. - (the Honda VTEC, I believe) The Toyota system takes it quite a bit further, allowing for continuous adjustment on both the intake and exhaust sides again in response to computer readings - allowing for not only some HP, but also effectively 'flattening' out of the torque curve, as well as improved emissions. (CVVTi in their lingo). The DT 3.0 if I'm not mistaken, is mechanical shift only on the intake side and does nothing about lift duration. If this suppostion is correct, don't know if this could conceivably be why the engine is so reticent to rev and/or is relatively HP challenged. You sound like a man that could answer that?

I'm not entirely sure but I recall someone posting that the manual states just that. When in "L" the tranny decides which gear is best, between 2 or 3 gears, given gas pedal placement, speed, etc. Someone who has actually used it could maybe let us all know how that works?

A stick can be fun, but not around town. I prefer a stick on a sports car, preferably RWD. For FWD, from now on, I will stick with automatics.

I'm the opposite for the most part. Cars we've owned with sticks include a '96 Civic EX, '98 ZX2, '04 Mazda6 S, and currently an '06 Mustang GT. The only one I hated driving in city traffic, which I do on a daily basis, was the Civic because it had zero low end power. As long as the car has some power and I don't have to rev it up to move a few feet I'm happy. The 6 was FWD and an absolute blast to drive.

FWIW I did test drive the Mazda6 i with a stick and the V6 with the manumatic. The i was like the Civic to me and the manumatic was useless because it shifted too early IMO. Plus there was the whole bored left foot sydrome associtated with it.

Honda continues to build about the best smaller engines on the market but what I was doing was comparing one of the best to perhaps one of the worst. In response to an argument that seemed to imply that that DT in question must be a good or current engine simply because it has 24 valves or multiple OHCs, and/or a rudimentary valve timing system. Those specific engines you mention, the Toyota 3.5, the GM 3.6 are fine examples or the state of the art and in that respect are 'better' (if better, is defined as more current technologically) than the design that Honda is currently using. You forgot BTW the VW 3.6, the MB 3.5 and about every BMW inline 6 ever produced. Point taken, you can point to a whole bunch of engines over the years (the GM 3.8 and more V8s than you can count?) that has served their purposes well, but there remains a vast difference in how a Honda/Nissan/Toyota/Hyundai engine feels and sounds relative to that DT we were talking about) that is not exactly related to how much power each happen to put out.

PS I fully expect that it'll be Honda that shortly comes out with some engine superior in almost all respects even to the Toyota 2GR-FSE you mentioned.

When driving that DT30 Fusion, I enjoyed the performance, and please don't think I am "bashing" or "hating," but I wanted to lift off the throttle well before redline. It did not feel nearly as "refined." This, to me, takes away some of the enjoyment of putting an internal combustion engine through its paces.Thank you, exactly what I'm talking about, with many of the other cars in this group, you don't have the time to "want to lift off the throttle"

Did you drive the 2.3L I4? If so, did you have the same impression of that engine?

Yes I have driven the 2.3L I4: normally aspirated in a 2006 Fusion SE manual, and then turbocharged and direct-injected in a 2006 Mazdaspeed Mazda6.

In normally aspirated form, I noticed a slight "buzziness" to the sound, not entirely displeasing because it reminded me of the 2.2L I4 I had in my first car, a 1991 Mazda 626. Also, when accelerating through the gears, I'd let off the gas completely and push in the clutch, and the RPMs would always jump up by 500. The manual shift knob was huge, and the lever action wasn't very precise (not unlike my 1998 626 ES-V6). As I mentioned before, the Ford/Mazda 2.3L (at least in the midsizers) feels a notch slower than the Camry 2.4L, which is a notch (or two) below the Honda 2.4L. Performance/acceleration numbers seem to bear this out. I'm sure it's more fun in a Mazda3 or Focus. Bottom line, I wouldn't call this motor "unrefined," it was quite happy to buzz along. I just wanted more grunt from my 4-banger.

In turbo form, the motor was a real hoot. Tons of torque, but power started to drop off above about 4,800 RPM. I liked it very much, and would have purchased it, but even heavily discounted to around $24,000 it was a little more than I wanted to spend, even before I figured up the insurance!

This was from a high volume dealer about 100 miles away. The local dealer was only discounting the car $500 and had a $210 higher doc fee and throws in $500 advertising for good measure. The dealer we bought from had an internet price of $1800 below INVOICE. There was a general $1,000 rebate and another $1,000 rebate if financed through Hyundai Finance (5.9% for 60 months)We also qualified for the owner loyalty rebate of $500. Our price for the car, before doc + ttl, was $4300 under invoice or $5429 below MSRP.

The resale value game is a shell game. Trade-in value or retail value of a used car? I just saw Enterprise rent-a-car offering a comparably equipped '06 Sonata with 14,692 miles for $17,999 and they say, "blue book retail value" of $20,690. Enterprise is a "no haggle" price.